EMAC4372 - Fall 2016
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Debates
Nov 29
–Donkey Kong: YES
–King Boo: NO
2. Whose fault is it that we now have an oversaturation of clickbaits on established news sites such as The Washington Post?
–Yoshi: Journalists
–Bowser: Audiences
Dec 1
–Birdo: YES
–Princess Peach: NO
4. Google’s not letting offensive or disparaging phrases appear in conjunction with any politician's name in autocomplete is a violation of our first amendment rights
–Princess Daisy: YES
–Kirby: NO
Dec 6
–Wario: YES
–Mario: NO
6. Pizza Party (I will buy the pizzas. You guys are welcome, though not required, to bring other things to share!)
Highlighted = Winners. Congratulations!
Monday, November 14, 2016
Grade Calculation
- Class Participation (25%):
- [overall performance out of 100] / 100 x 25 = _________
- Absences, in-class exercises, in-class exercise extra credits, basic engagement (e.g., points off if repeatedly reminded to focus on class rather than digital devices, etc.). See syllabus for more detail
- Keep in mind that you will not be penalized for being reticent in class. I've made sure throughout the semester that everyone got to share something in class so you are okay as far as engagement goes!).
- Reading Responses (20%):
- [raw # submitted on time] / 5 x 10 = ________
- [quality out of 100] / 100 x 10 = _________
- Assume you have 95+ for quality as long as you did not merely summarize the readings, which is the only criteria for reading responses. See syllabus for clarification.
- In-class Exam (25%):
- [raw number] / 135 x 25 = ________
- Team Debate (30%):
- [debate performance out of 100 ] / 100 x 15 = ________
- [research paper out of 100] / 100 x 15 = ________
- For grading criteria, see: http://emac4372f16.blogspot.com/2016/10/lets-debate.html
- Debate Winners: ___+1____
Fill out the equation above and add up all the numbers above the green lines. The sum should be between 0 and 100. Please see Grading Scheme (syllabus, p.2) for corresponding grade distribution.
If you have any questions or concerns about your grade or anything else, please don't hesitate to see me!
Saturday, November 12, 2016
#IAmWithLove
You, too, can brighten someone else's day particularly in uncertain times. It may feel awkward at first, but it's absolutely worth doing.
Will you give it (or any alternative format that doesn't involve money) a try when you can? :)
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Old Post REPOSTED FOR LABEL AND CREDIT
Response to: Research in India suggests Google can influence an election by Craig Timberg.
In this article Timberg suggests that major search engines can manipulate search results to ultimately influence the voter choice and voter preferences. Timberg focuses on referencing psychologist Robert Epstein's experiment in India to support this suggestion. Epstein found that search engines can "profoundly influence voters without them noting the impact". Epstein calls this Search Engine Manipulation Effect.
The critics of this study pointed out that there are other factors to be taken into account that effect this study, such as the voters prior "party allegiances, potent issues and ethnic and religious affiliations." Critics also pointed out that major search engine operators have reason to avoid the appearance of manipulating election search results on the account of not undermining the public's trust and the backlash that would occur.
However, the studies Epstein conducted do make sense. Manipulating the results on his search engine did impact the voter's choice in candidate. We may also account this manipulation having such an impact because of confirmation bias, priming, and framing; as these studies were conducted right before the voter voted for his/her candidate of choice.
On a side note, there were rumors that Google had manipulated their search results with Hillary Clinton cr ...., instead of criminal, crime reform, cried, etc comes up instead. I put it to the test and I got a mixed result.
In this article Timberg suggests that major search engines can manipulate search results to ultimately influence the voter choice and voter preferences. Timberg focuses on referencing psychologist Robert Epstein's experiment in India to support this suggestion. Epstein found that search engines can "profoundly influence voters without them noting the impact". Epstein calls this Search Engine Manipulation Effect.
The critics of this study pointed out that there are other factors to be taken into account that effect this study, such as the voters prior "party allegiances, potent issues and ethnic and religious affiliations." Critics also pointed out that major search engine operators have reason to avoid the appearance of manipulating election search results on the account of not undermining the public's trust and the backlash that would occur.
However, the studies Epstein conducted do make sense. Manipulating the results on his search engine did impact the voter's choice in candidate. We may also account this manipulation having such an impact because of confirmation bias, priming, and framing; as these studies were conducted right before the voter voted for his/her candidate of choice.
On a side note, there were rumors that Google had manipulated their search results with Hillary Clinton cr ...., instead of criminal, crime reform, cried, etc comes up instead. I put it to the test and I got a mixed result.
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
Saturday, November 5, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)